Occum's Razor = some Crop Circles are 'real'

[laver]

Didn't you read the OP? No wait, you made it. They use microwaves, there's microwave evidence in the plants, maybe the rods produce microwaves to travel fast and crop circles are the by product of their mating habits! OCCAM'S RAZOR!

Now that is new theory that I for one have never heard before! mating rods ? but I think you may get stiff opposition from some quarters with that one....

[Hasina]

Now that is new theory that I for one have never heard before! mating rods ? but I think you may get stiff opposition from some quarters with that one....

I did just make it up :3 wouldn't explain a few things. If rods give off microwaves, why don't they damage electrical equipment? My answer to keep my wacky theory going, they only produce the microwaves during mating or their mating dances, which, when performed in a crop field, produces crop circles. I ain't saying it's true, but I do like making up theories.

[Sweetpumper]

Mating rods that create beautiful patterns. They sometimes also move intelligently and resemble metallic spheres.

[laver]

Newton said: 'We are to admit no more causes of *natural* things than such as are true, and explain their appearance'. I see a problem here. Crop circles are not, for the most part, a natural phenomenon. Can Occam's razor be reliably applied where either human or extraterrestrial artifice is involved? I'm not at all certain it can be. Will an intelligent being always act in the simplest and most obvious way? I scarcely think so.

Take, for example, an objection to the extraterrestrial explanation for crop circles: That it is illogical for extraterrestrials to come all the way to Earth, just to press patterns into grain fields, and remain in hiding, instead of overtly revealing themselves. The simplest course of action is the latter. There may be good reasons for the the former course, though. If we do not know this reason, we may dismiss the extraterrestrial possibility out of hand, as more complex, and so, not conforming to Occam's razor. The value of a worthy principle like Occam's razor is only as good as our understanding of the situation to which it is applied.

The fact that some crop circles are known to have been made by human beings tempts us to suppose that they all are. This explanation seems to be the simplest available, and so, by William of Occam's estimable reasoning, the best. There is a problem here, too, though. There are eyewitness accounts of crop circles being made in moments, with no human involvement, and other accounts of their having appeared too soon after a field was last seen unmarked, for human construction to be credible.

It may, of course, be objected that the witnesses lied. Funny, though, that's what Thomas Jefferson said about two astronomers who said they'd seen rocks fall from the sky. He couldn't believe such a thing could happen, so the simplest, and best explanation was that they had lied. Today we know and accept rocks from the sky as meteorites.

Thank you for your interesting post. I did note in the Newton quote the word 'natural' but I don't think Newton would object to us applying the Occum Razor principle or his definition to our present problem after all much of his work seems to have involved heavenly bodies. Agreed that an intelligent bearing may not always act in the simplest and most logical way, be that 'being' human or not?

As you say we do not know the motive behind the foreign intelligence that seems to be creating some of these designs which might be of a spiritual nature.

Because of the evidence in the crops of microwave radiation being used to make the designs, a technique not available or known to humans, and the considerable body of evidence that some of these designs appear very quickly without humans present it would be reasonable to say that on a balance of probability some of these designs have a non earthly origin.

This is because another important word in Newton's definition is 'True'; we can only consider matters that are true. The evidence in the crops is true, the many accounts of their creation quickly without human involvement does seem to be true( subject to witness unreliability ), the designs are there on the landscape - true. On the other hand for someone to say that all designs are human merely on the basis that we do not understand the reason why they are there is no great argument particularly when some designs do contain math and geometric messages. Is this the only evidence of a foreign intellience at working our world?

Probably not ; there have been many sightings by reliable witnesses of unidentified flying objects. Many can be discounted but surely a reasonable person would keep an open mind on that matter.

At first sight it would appear that Occum's Razor supports the human creation of all crop circles but when one considers the evidence, factual evidence, against this proposal it becomes untenable and the simplest solution is that some of these designs are foreign

[DingoLingo]

If we have crop designs that defy human logic

Ok what you really need to say is defy believers logic.. not human logic..

Human logic is humans made this.. believers logic is either A - Aliens did.. or B its spiritual

so please.. dont lump humanity as a whole into the defying logic bit

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/8671207/Crop-circles-created-using-GPS-lasers-and-microwaves.html

and if you do a bit of a search around you can find out how to make your own magnetron using parts from a microwave oven and a battery..

[The Id3al Experience]

Ok what you really need to say is defy believers logic.. not human logic..

Human logic is humans made this.. believers logic is either A - Aliens did.. or B its spiritual

so please.. dont lump humanity as a whole into the defying logic bit

http://www.telegraph...microwaves.html

and if you do a bit of a search around you can find out how to make your own magnetron using parts from a microwave oven and a battery..

So with the above and all other current evidence, and Occams Razor - Simple answer, Man made.

Case closed.

[laver]

I did just make it up :3 wouldn't explain a few things. If rods give off microwaves, why don't they damage electrical equipment? My answer to keep my wacky theory going, they only produce the microwaves during mating or their mating dances, which, when performed in a crop field, produces crop circles. I ain't saying it's true, but I do like making up theories.

It is an interesting theory and making up theories is a sign of good imagination and a fertile mind. Don't know what Freud would have made of it tho ?

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

It is an interesting theory and making up theories is a sign of good imagination and a fertile mind. Don't know what Freud would have made of it tho ?

Freud would have blamed our mothers

[laver]

Freud would have blamed our mothers

Probably... weird guy!

[Esoteric Toad]

Mating rods that create beautiful patterns. They sometimes also move intelligently and resemble metallic spheres.

And let's not forget orbs

[laver]

And let's not forget orbs

Indeed, there are some interesting accounts of orbs sometimes being connected to crop design creation

[bison]

There do appear to be some microwave-like effects on crops, that diminish with distance from the center of the formation. Most crop circles are slightly oval rather than perfect circles. This could be interpreted as the 'footprint' of a radiant beam from above, aimed slightly off the vertical. We also have numerous accounts of interference with electronic devices taken into certain circles; typically the unusual draining of batteries. How this is to be explained is unclear.

Edited January 10, 2013 by bison

[DingoLingo]

I will wait for the day when there is credible evidence that crop circles are not man made.. so far.. that has never been shown..

[psyche101]

I will wait for the day when there is credible evidence that crop circles are not man made.. so far.. that has never been shown..

I have tracked down the source of the OP's claim.

Surprise, surprise. Guess what, It's Pravda.

How is it Russian Scientists seem to be the whackiest. I imagine that they all look a bit like the German Scientist from Iron Sky.

They are not saying "it is unknown or ET". Not at all. They figure lightning strikes release microwaves that create crop circles. In fact, they are even rather upset (that;s gotta say something!!) with the insinuations, such as the OP has put forth.

A recent documentary about mysterious crop circles aired on "ORT" along with several publications in Russian newspaper "Arguments and Facts" once again begin to stir up the media. The latter mentions an interesting "version of one biophysicist from Krasnoyarsk". Interestingly, I first reported my point of views on "Pravda.Ru"'s website. Later, the information became known in various media sources abroad.

What saddens me the most is the fact that Russians continue being exposed to the nonsensical information about the extraterrestrial. In reality, such facts pertain to an absolutely different topic. Today, I am willing to return to my previous topic and reveal certain facts.

Perhaps, there exists a more global reason behind all this. Perhaps, people are intentionally trying to make alien existence a reality in order to persuade people of some revolutionary ideas. Besides, many of the "drawings" resemble a revolutionary perspective in scientific development. In other words, people might think that it is extraterrestrial intellect that transfers its valuable data to us. Whereas in reality, it might all be created by humans.

As for me personally, I think that the whole deal about crop circles is nothing but an evil game played by "financial gods." New Russians for instance have plenty of money to spare. They buy elephants, golden toilets and what not. Western billionaires have their own weirdness. They also like to confuse the public.

LINK

Even the original premise is wrong, and some half cooked nonsense probably gleaned from one of these UFO websites with garish colours, but from what I can tell, this "hypothesis" is not suited to this very forum, but perhaps Natural World. Because the actual claim is:

A crop circle is in fact an ancient phenomenon. It is a result of scantily studied process dealing with atmospheric electricity. There exists a special term in electrical engineering -"glow discharge." The term resembles a similar incident where quite lightning along with condensation occurs on rye or ear fields. The stems accumulate the charge. Now, let me describe the actual mechanism of such process.

Obviously, there has to be some kind of force that pushes stems to the ground. How? In a crop circle, stems are bent in a spiral, as a result of a vertical air flow. Air needed to be lifted in order to result in such vertical air flow. Air begins moving upward only when it heats up. Therefore, there had to be temperature increase at a certain point which later had moved upward after coming in touch with cool air from the sides. So what about the stems? Well, the stems heat up as a result of soil temperature increase. As a result, those stems loose their firmness and bend easily.

Today, there appear quite harmless yet rather mysterious crop circles world wide. After examining the actual mechanism of such crops, someone decided to use it for their own reasons. Obviously, modern technology enables people to create practically anything. Beginning from late 80s, there appeared numerous circles on multiple fields across the world.

How can one heat up the soil from afar? Everyone is aware of microwave ovens. Besides, there have already been reports about newly designed “weapon” aimed at scaring away naughty demonstrators. The device is aimed at a person’s face and heats up the skin. Today, the only question concerns the way such beam will be able to reach quite distant territory.

After publishing my recent article "Aliens are nothing! Transnational corporations draw crop circles," I have received numerous e-mails and letters from interested readers. Extraterrestrial lovers however do not accept such stand point. They pose a reasonable question, "why would any transnational corporation be interested in creating such circles and therefore perplexing people?"

The author goes on to call these corporations "wealthy satanists"

Honestly, I am not sure how much "science" is involved is any at all, but it does read like it was written by a superstitious person. Not a scientist.

And yes, as everyone suspected, the usage of Occam's Razor is fallacious and incorrect.

[DONTEATUS]

WHere do we get in Line for our Free Prize?

[psyche101]

WHere do we get in Line for our Free Prize?

You get to watch Iron Sky

[laver]

There do appear to be some microwave-like effects on crops, that diminish with distance from the center of the formation. Most crop circles are slightly oval rather than perfect circles. This could be interpreted as the 'footprint' of a radiant beam from above, aimed slightly off the vertical. We also have numerous accounts of interference with electronic devices taken into certain circles; typically the unusual draining of batteries. How this is to be explained is unclear.

The ovality of crop circles is interesting and brings to mind the shape of ancient stone circles which are often not true circles at all. Much research has been done on this notably by Professor Thom and his son over many years who propose an ancient knowledge of geometry. Although initially discounted this seems now to be being given much more serious consideration. The proximity of many crop designs to ancient locations on the landscape and having a focal point in Wiltshire with its many ancient sites is worthy of consideration. The interference with electronic devices is a strange fact but might be another way of drawing our attention to these phenomena

[bison]

I have tracked down the source of the OP's claim.

Surprise, surprise. Guess what, It's Pravda.

How is it Russian Scientists seem to be the whackiest. I imagine that they all look a bit like the German Scientist from Iron Sky.

They are not saying "it is unknown or ET". Not at all. They figure lightning strikes release microwaves that create crop circles. In fact, they are even rather upset (that;s gotta say something!!) with the insinuations, such as the OP has put forth.

LINK

Even the original premise is wrong, and some half cooked nonsense probably gleaned from one of these UFO websites with garish colours, but from what I can tell, this "hypothesis" is not suited to this very forum, but perhaps Natural World. Because the actual claim is:

The author goes on to call these corporations "wealthy satanists"

Honestly, I am not sure how much "science" is involved is any at all, but it does read like it was written by a superstitious person. Not a scientist.

And yes, as everyone suspected, the usage of Occam's Razor is fallacious and incorrect.

Not all information on the involvement of microwaves in the creation of crop circles comes from such a dubious source. The article linked below discusses an article on this topic, which appeared in Physics World. There still seems to be some reasonable doubts about human proficiency with microwaves, so as to be able to create crop circles. Link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alejandro-rojas/crop-circle-microwave-ano_b_929152.html

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

Indeed, there are some interesting accounts of orbs sometimes being connected to crop design creation

"orbs"?

Orbs are motes of dust caught in the flash of a camera.

[psyche101]

Not all information on the involvement of microwaves in the creation of crop circles comes from such a dubious source. The article linked below discusses an article on this topic, which appeared in Physics World. There still seems to be some reasonable doubts about human proficiency with microwaves, so as to be able to create crop circles. Link: http://www.huffingto...o_b_929152.html

So there is several dubious sources associated with this claim? The Huffington Post article references and links to the BLT Research page as "evidence"

Colin says some of the conclusions of BLT's researcher William Levengood are plain wrong and the

group should admit the mistake.

He claims to have filmed proof that circle plants Levengood said showed good evidence of the genuine

"crop circle making energy" were in fact from a fake circle made by Nancy's own plant samplers.

Nancy sparked the dispute in a piece she wrote for the Report a Crop Circle Facebook page responding

to questions about published papers by her BLT group.

She suggested "No reputable professional scientist would challenge already published work without

having carried out research replicating the research they are challenging"

She adds: "And if some of the lay-people involved in the crop circle situation are themselves raising

questions about the scientific work, such questions are basically insignificant...precisely because these

lay-people do not have the academic or scientific training needed to correctly understand what the

published material actual says."

But weighing in with his own statement headed: "BLT got it wrong and should admit it and move on", Colin

argues: "It does not always necessitate replication of a finding to prove the scientist is heading

down the wrong road".

He claims he filmed Nancy's crop circle samplers making a crop circle, sending samples to her from it and

then finally viewing Levengood's findings back to them.

Writes Colin: "Mr. Levengood concluded that the plants from this circle were among the best examples of

the real phenomenon and showed the highest crop circle making energy. But the team and I knew

differently. Whatever the science and protocols, whatever his findings, the plants came from a man made

crop circle. The results showed whatever they showed but the interpretation

was wrong".

LINK

What do you expect from the Bacon Lettuce Tomato Institute LOL.

Edited January 11, 2013 by psyche101

[psyche101]

"orbs"?

Orbs are motes of dust caught in the flash of a camera.

Alien dust motes mate.

The ovality of crop circles is interesting and brings to mind the shape of ancient stone circles which are often not true circles at all. Much research has been done on this notably by Professor Thom and his son over many years who propose an ancient knowledge of geometry. Although initially discounted this seems now to be being given much more serious consideration. The proximity of many crop designs to ancient locations on the landscape and having a focal point in Wiltshire with its many ancient sites is worthy of consideration. The interference with electronic devices is a strange fact but might be another way of drawing our attention to these phenomena

Ovality? I thought the majority were quite circular.

[bison]

Alien dust motes mate.

Ovality? I thought the majority were quite circular.

The circular-appearing parts of many crop circle formations are substantially oval or elliptical. This is generally not apparent to casual inspection of photographs, but careful measurements have shown this again and again. The degree of departure from circularity is often greater than would be expected, given the otherwise high level of precision in some formations.

[bison]

So there is several dubious sources associated with this claim? The Huffington Post article references and links to the BLT Research page as "evidence"

LINK

What do you expect from the Bacon Lettuce Tomato Institute LOL.

So some people knowingly created and submitted fraudulent evidence, allowing it to be believed that it was from a phenomenon with an unknown cause. I wouldn't expect BLT research to be infallible in their determinations. This is on the cutting edge of science. The best scientific minds have been taken in by hoaxes at times. The Piltdown man hoax is a good example of this. Shall we dismiss anthropologists and paleontologists as mad scientists, too?

[JesseCuster]

The circular-appearing parts of many crop circle formations are substantially oval or elliptical. This is generally not apparent to casual inspection of photographs, but careful measurements have shown this again and again. The degree of departure from circularity is often greater than would be expected, given the otherwise high level of precision in some formations.

How can something be "substantially oval or elliptical" but "not apparent to casual inspection of photographs" and requires "careful measurements"?

If it requires careful measurements to determine that something is in fact elliptical and not perfectly circular then the eccentricity is obviously very close to zero and thus it can't be "substantially elliptical". If something is slightly off from circular wouldn't you just put that down to imperfection by the circle makers?

Also, do you have a source for that "many crop circle formation are substantially oval or elliptical"?

Anyway, if you remember your high school maths, it's not much harder to draw an ellipse than it is a circle. An ellipse requires 2 sticks (and an extra person for a crop circle) to mark the foci whereas a circle only needs one to mark the center. After that you need a piece of string (rope) and a pencil (board for smashing).

Edited January 11, 2013 by Archimedes

[bison]

How can something be "substantially oval or elliptical" but "not apparent to casual inspection of photographs" and requires "careful measurements"?

If it requires careful measurements to determine that something is in fact elliptical and not perfectly circular then the eccentricity is obviously very close to zero and thus it can't be "substantially elliptical". If something is slightly off from circular wouldn't you just put that down to imperfection by the circle makers?

Also, do you have a source for that "many crop circle formation are substantially oval or elliptical"?

Anyway, if you remember your high school maths, it's not much harder to draw an ellipse than it is a circle. An ellipse requires 2 sticks (and an extra person for a crop circle) to mark the foci whereas a circle only needs one to mark the center. After that you need a piece of string (rope) and a pencil (board for smashing).

Where does slight leave off and substantial begin? A judgement call, I suppose. If you prefer slight, please substitute that for substantial. Also a matter a of judgement about how much ellipticity can be ascribed to error in a formation with a certain level of precision. I have no one source for what I said about the ellipticity of many crop circles. It comes from studying the measured diagrams of quite a few. I realize that drawing an ellipse is not particularly difficult. I am not aware of any indications that this was done intentionally by human crop circle makers. As the departure from round is not readily apparent, their reason for doing so escapes me.